Reform of our election laws must be a priority: Full Fact response to the Queen’s Speech

Reforms to laws on digital political campaigning are vital and long overdue. Unlike offline campaigns, where many people experience the same advertising, online campaigns increasingly target ads at small, specific groups of people, with multiple versions tested rapidly to see which works best. In a democracy, an election must be a shared experience.

Without detailed information on which groups these adverts are targeted at and who they reach, along with details on cost and who paid for them, the public will be left in the dark. Meanwhile, organisations like ours will be unable to effectively scrutinise the campaigns and hold them to account.

Today’s speech restated the government’s plans to implement the so-called imprint regime - where adverts must say who paid for them - for online material, with technical proposals due “in the coming months”.

The Cabinet Office first promised such changes in May, but the government has yet to take action. And with a general election expected imminently, there remains a risk that such proposals - and subsequent reforms - will not be implemented in time to ensure that vote is properly protected.

We want to see technical proposals that, at a minimum, includes measures to ensure transparency of online campaigning and advertising, and a protocol for warning the public when major interference is detected. Without reform, any election called will not be properly protected or open to full scrutiny from journalists, academics and organisations like Full Fact.

The Queen’s Speech also set out plans for ministers to “continue to develop proposals to improve internet safety”, with further details committing the government to publish draft legislation, based on the measures set out in the Online Harms White Paper, for pre-legislative scrutiny.

Full Fact agrees that the time for action is now. It is essential that these decisions are taken through open democratic transparent processes, not by internet companies alone. We urge the government to proceed with caution. It must continue to address the risks associated with interference in free speech.

In particular, Full Fact remains concerned that the Online Harms White Paper proposes too broad a role for the regulator, placing on it excessively strong and unrealistic expectations. We have called for a greater role for parliamentary scrutiny, and parliamentarians should expect to legislate regularly in this area.